>> welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. this is "new day." it's thursday, may 2. it's 6:00 in new york. this morning, your move, robert mueller. how will the special counsel respond now that the attorney general labeled his concerns as, quote, a bit snitty? how does mueller feel about the fact that the attorney general essentially cleared the president of obstruction of justice despite ten instances laid out in the mueller report in detail? and when will we hear from mueller himself? we'll not here from the attorney general, at least not this morning >> barr is refusing to testify today before the house judiciary committee because the democrats wanted staff attorneys to ask questions. also defying a subpoena to turn over the full mueller report. the attorney general could face contempt proceedings. barr defended his handling of

the mueller report though the special counsel sent him the letter in late march objecting to barr's characterization of the report's findings. democrats are accusing barr of lying to congress, many calling for his resignation. jessica schneider has the latest. >> reporter: good morning. the battle over barr's testimony slides into a second day now. this time with a war of words over barr's intended no-show before the house judiciary committee. barr was called weeks ago but the two sides have been haggling over the set-up of questioning. now the justice department saying barr will not appear since the format is unnecessary. the doj is refusing to provide the full mueller report without redactions prompting nadler to threaten contempt. attorney general william barr refusing to testify again today, objecting over the house hearing format for questioning. house democrats demanding staff

lawyers ask questions of barr in a 30-minute block in addition to five-minute round of questions from lawmakers. the judiciary committee's chairman intends to leave an empty witness chair for barr and threatens to hold him in contempt >> he's trying to blackmail the committee. >> reporter: president trump slamming house democrats and supporting barr's decision. >> i guess they want to treat him differently. for many years they have never done it this way, bringing in outside counsel or something. that's not the way -- you elected people. they're supposed to be doing their own talking. >> reporter: christine blase ford was questioned last year. barr defended himself before contentious senate hearing >> it was my decision how and when to make it public, not bob mueller's. >> reporter: focusing on mueller's communications with barr after the attorney general sent a memo to congress summarizing the special

counsel's findings. mueller saying it did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of this office's work and conclusions >> his work concluded when he sent his work to the attorney general. at that point it was my baby. i didn't feel it was in the public interest to allow this to go on for several weeks without saying anything. so i decided to state what the bottom line conclusions were. >> this letter was an extraordinary act, a career prosecutor rebuking the attorney general of the united states memorializing it in writing. right? >> you know, the letter is a bit snitty. it was probably written by one of his staff people. >> reporter: the attorney general stressing mueller told him nothing was factually incorrect. >> he was clear he was not suggesting that we had misrepresented his report. >> reporter: regardless of the president's claims. >> it was a complete and total

exoneration. >> reporter: barr pushing back saying he did not exonerate trump. >> i didn't exonerate. i said that we did not believe there was sufficient evidence to establish an obstruction offense which is the job of the justice department. >> reporter: senators questioning the attorney general on his conclusion there was no obstruction of justice case despite mueller laying out ten episodes of potential obstruction by president trump. >> we are not in the business of exoneration. we are not in the business of proving they didn't violate the law. i found that passage -- >> reporter: barr making a stunning revelation when grilled by one of the 2020 hopefuls. >> in reaching your conclusion did you personally review all of the underlying evidence? >> no. >> did -- >> we accepted -- >> did mr. rod rosenstein? >> no. we accepted the statements in the report as the factual record. we didn't go underneath it

>> you didn't look at the underlying evidence that supports the conclusions in the report? >> no. >> reporter: democrats accusing barr of lying referring to this exchange last month at a senate hearing before the redacted mueller report was publicly released. >> did bob mueller support your conclusion? >> i don't know whether bob mueller supported your conclusion. >> reporter: the attorney general trying to clarify. >> the question was relating to unidentified members who were expressing frustration over the accuracy relating to findings. i don't know what that refers to at all. >> reporter: the answer, not enough for democrats. the hearing and house judiciary will proceed even without barr. it is expected to gavel in at 9:00 with opening statements from chairman nadler and top republican doug collins. they are looking forward to robert mueller's possible testimony. chairman nadler saying may 15 is the target date and the justice department wasn't objecting to

mueller's appearance. crucially, no confirmation from mueller himself just yet. >> not yet. to me, jessica, that is the biggest question now out of the hearings yesterday. when will we hear from robert mueller and what did robert mueller think about what he saw yesterday? our thanks to jessica schneider >> i wish there was a live camera in robert mueller's living room while he was watching that. >> this is what it would have looked like. >> upset. >> happy, elated, depressed. all of those things >> you're right. >> i'm not sure the live camera would tell us much, but questions to him could be revealing. joining us now, david chalyan doing his robert mueller impression. asha rangapa, cnn national and legal analyst and john avlon, cnn political analyst. what now for democrats?

what now for bill barr? he's not going to show up to the hearing today. and what for robert mueller? >> asha, if you were robert mueller watching that yesterday, what are you thinking this morning and what questions do you think you have to answer to congress and the american people? >> i think robert mueller watching that yesterday would find that what barr did at the hearing was just more of what he did in his initial letter and then later in his press conference which was to confuse and obfuscate and misstate and mislead about the law. i think that mueller could come in and clarify those things. i think mueller is an incredibly under stated person. he's not going to editorialize in person any more than in writing. he can certainly clarify the nature and context of his findings which is what he believed barr had not done

accurately >> david chalyan, now almost 24 hours later, what do you think is the thing that sticks with everyone after this barr testimony? >> we have to get some other version of the story that's being told of the march 5 meeting that barr had with mueller. that's been hanging out there since barr first mentioned that in his press conference when the mueller report was released. we have to get the other side of that phone call they had later in march that barr was talking about yesterday. that needs to be squared away. i don't think we should have any expectation it will be a rumble that bob mueller will come in and throw barr under the bus. you just played a little bit of chris van holland's comments with bill barr and bill barr yesterday trying to explain it. his explanation made absolutely no sense to what actually chris

van hollen was asking. he recharacterized what he was asked about into something -- you just heard the sound bite again. i still think we have an attorney general with a little bit of a credibility problem on this day after his testimony before the senate judiciary committee. >> can i jump in, john? the two things david said are related now. we need to hear from robert mueller about the conversations because bill barr's versions are now not reliable. we know he has twisted what mueller said about other things. how and why can we believe barr's version of the telephone conversation? >> unfortunately, we can't. the attorney general has been caught over and over again misleading the american people and congress about the contents of the report and even yesterday, sticking to talking points that are at odds with the text of the mueller report. so you've got a situation where the attorney general seems to believe his role is as part of the white house defense team, not as somebody whose job is

bigger than being white house counsel. that leads to credibility gap problems. the difference is barr, unflappable, dogged, doesn't seem to care. that undermines faith in our institutions. that's where the larger danger comes in >> he's also parsing words to within an inch of their lives. >> oh, man. >> he's parsing them to a millimeter. summary? i'm not sure what you mean exactly by summary. >> summarize and summary are two completely different -- >> specify which one you mean. i thought that was an interesting insight into either how he's trying to obfuscate or how his mind works because he's claiming he didn't mislead congress originally when they asked did you know of any objections from mueller's team to how you characterized this. he zeroed in on the exact wording to get around it. >> yeah.

alisyn, you know, the attorney general p incredibly precise words like snitty and spying. he chose to parse words at various points. when he didn't want to directly answer the question. if you noticed, i would say many of the questions yesterday were poorly worded, ambiguous. they left him a lot of room. when he was under questioning by people who really drilled down like senator harris, for example, he started to, you know, bob and weave. this goes to why he doesn't want to show up today. he knows if staff attorneys question him they will be giving him more surgical questions without the kind of leeway he had yesterday to do his talking points. it seems clear to me mueller had summaries in his report, that he expected to be released. he mentioned it in the letter >> he said that specifically.

specifically they say they thought the executive summaries is what should have been released to congress and to the public and what bill barr did to remind everybody in the letter from robert mueller did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of the office's working conclusions and created public confusion about critical aspects of the findings. that's just -- yeah. john? >> the doj yesterday saying mueller was clear he didn't take issue with the contents of the characterizations by the attorney general. >> he did. >> yes, he did. that's where the credibility gap starts flowing from. it's fundamental. >> david, this hearing with barr will not appear at today, the political ramifications of all of that and how democrats will handle this going forward. they actually have a new range of questions facing them all of the sudden >> it's such a good question, john. the democrats have to make a

strategic choice overall about how much is this going to be their agenda? how much are they wanting to keep this on the front burner? you have heard nancy pelosi and others say, hey, the committee should go continue to do their work. if the attorney general doesn't show up and you need to hold the attorney general in contempt, you keep going down there, but we are going to focus on health care or xyz issues and continue to pass our agenda. that's far easier said than done. democrats will have to consider here. if you have the full out fights with the administration which is stonewalling you, there is no doubt the base of the democratic party wants to see the democratic congress they elected fight those fights. yet, there are those in the party that believe that may not be the politically strategic avenue to take >> john, what about the democrats were dug in on having the staff attorneys do the questioning. you told us that is an unusual

set-up and they could have done other things. there are a million creative ways they could have gotten around this. >> it's unusual, not unprecedented. it was done during watergate and the iran-contra hearings >> that's a long time. >> nadler insisting on this may have deprived house democrats of a chance to obviously interview, question attorney general barr at the outset. it is a question about what's the right fight for democrats? the emphasis should be on the additional investigation that needs to be done. the administration is stonewalling democrats. those are fights that are much bigger than partisan fights for democrat versus republican. it is about oversight, checks and balances. those need to be pursued. it gets to the heart of our system. there are ongoing investigations, for example, into the money trail about the trump organizations that the house should be focusing on and continuing to do. that will bring new information to the table, not just fisticuffs, if you will

>> after the hearings yesterday i'm not sure what more we would have learned from william barr today. maybe everybody is better served preparing questions for robert mueller. i'm not sure america loses much from not having the hearing today. we will see >> all right, thank you all very much. will we ever see former white house counsel don mcgahn answer questions before congress? of course, all of the unanswered questions after attorney general barr's testimony. we have more on that next. >> announcer: "new day" brought to you by sleep number. only at a sleep number store near you. senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. so you can come out swinging, maintain your inner focus, and wake up rested

and ready for anything. sleep number is ranked #1 in customer satisfaction with mattresses by j. d. power. save $400 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. only for a limited time. here's the story of green mountain coffee roasters costa rica paraíso. meet sergio. and his daughter, maria. sergio's coffee tastes spectacular. because costa rica is spectacular. so we support farmers who use natural compost. to help keep the soil healthy. and the coffee delicious. for future generations. all for a smoother tasting cup. green mountain coffee roasters.

repair the enamel on a daily basis. with the new pronamel repair toothpaste we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go-to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair.

it's our best sale of the season semi-annual sale... my go-to toothpaste featuring 20% off select diamonds. dare to be devoted. only at jared.

it is not clear if former white house counsel don mcgahn will testify before congress. listen to this moment >> do you have any objections? can you think of an objection as to why don mcgahn should not testify before this committee about his experience? >> yes. i mean, i think he's a close adviser to the president >> never exerted executive privilege. may have already waived it >> we haven't waived the executive privilege. >> who is the we? >> who's we? >> john, the president is

supposed to give executive privilege. it makes it sound sometimes as though the attorney general is on the president's team >> that's what we call a tell. yeah. this gets to the heart of how bill barr sees his job and the testimony to date and the pregaming and framing of the report, he seems to be acting like a member of the president's defense team. that tell indicates it as well >> counselor, when you heard that, what did you think? >> i agree with john. there was no reason mcgahn can't come testify. in addition to the waiver of executive privilege, even if the white house, the president who actually holds the privilege asserted it, what he would be testifying about are potential acts of obstruction. we already know that executive privilege can't be used to shield that kind of evidence from coming to light. the third thing is mcgahn is no longer an employee.

there is no way to stop him from coming. this is like when sally yates testified. he still has the option of coming. there is no leverage the white house can exert to stop him >> he is at the heart of the matter from obstruction. what did the president tell him exactly about getting rid of robert mueller? what was the paperwork he was tasked with drafting in order to cover the fact that the president asked him to fire robert mueller and how did he refuse? all of those things seem to be pertinent >> precisely. we can listen to bill barr all day long explain that he wasn't ordered to fire mueller. bill barr wasn't there, wasn't part of the conversation. it would be important to hear from the person on the other end of the communication from the president about what he was perceiving the president to be ordering him to do. bill barr wasn't present for

that. i don't know how he can say that the president didn't order him to fire him >> we don't know if bill barr has read the transcripts. he didn't say he looked at the underlying evidence. all he looked at was the mueller report. david, i want to ask about this political revelation yesterday. the revelation was lindsey graham and his handling of this. >> cover your ears. >> october 19, 2016. trump is a [ bleep ] idiot. he's unable to provide a coherent answer. i'm sorry to the kids out there. these are the people that made a decision that clinton didn't do anything wrong and that counter-intelligence investigation of the trump campaign was warranted >> in addition to being fcc public enemy number one right now lindsey graham was reading text messages between lisa struck and lisa page there. david, what it teaches us is

what the chairman of the judiciary committee, the republican in charge, what his disposition is going forward. >> yeah. >> which is to be not just a defender of the president but somebody who is going to lead the charge in putting out a counter narrative when it is time to distract from a narrative. it was astonishing to see. especially for those who covered lindsey graham's career. it was astonishing to see it as embracing barr, protecting him in the witness chair and to take up these theories from the president that are not germane to why barr was sitting there testifying about what's in the subject of the mueller report. lindsey graham seems to be a complete apologist at this stage of the game which is not normally how you see the chair of a committee >> at one time lindsey graham

was a critic of donald trump. >> i can't remember that. >> i do. >> it was only two years ago. >> i remember vividly that lindsey graham at one time may have thought some of the same things he read yesterday and was a vocal critic. more importantly, as you were in the fbi for years, the fact that they have zeroed in on these text messages from peter strzok and lisa page as the defining moments i'm wondering from your experience in the fbi of the 35,000 people who work at the fbi, do you think any of them ever expressed or exchanged text messages that were critical of hillary clinton or no? >> i would expect that they did. it's very interesting you mention he went back to the text messages which were about trump and ostensibly i guess the idea

is that this somehow proves the bias or taint of the russia investigation. benow have the mueller report. the mueller report states on page 89, footnote 465 what the basis and predicate was of the mueller investigation. bill barr can look at the documentation. he's the attorney general. if he asked for it, he would get it within probably an hour. yet he has not reviewed that. he continues to allow, doesn't dispel at all this continuing conspiracy idea that the doj and fbi were out to spy on the president. that really undermines the credibility, not only of him but undermining people's faith and legitimacy which is a travesty. >> not only is he not dispelling. he's advancing saying there are people on the team looking into it. >> this is part of his opening

statement. this is a primary focus of the republicans on the hearing. not the contents of the report, not what the report says. a political effort to investigate the investigators at the president's behest to muddy the waters and distract and deflect. that's serious coming from the a.g. >> since you brought up hillary clinton, let's hear from her. she did an interview last night and responded to lindsey graham, the focus he would like to see and the hearings >> senator graham suggesting you are the one he wants to go after. >> that's an absolute disgrace. they know better. this is part of the whole technique to divert attention from what the real story is. the real story is the russians interfered in our election and trump committed obstruction of justice. that's the real story. that's what they don't want the american people thinking about.

when in doubt, say something wild about me >> much as i would like a hidden camera in robert mueller's tv room, sometimes i would like one in hillary clinton's tv -- >> no. >> i bet it would be more expressive. >> can you do the impersonation? >> no. what she thinks when she's watching a hearing and they lead with hillary clinton >> david? >> this is not new for hillary clinton to be the subject of these kinds of attacks. it's part of the entire career in public life. but her point shouldn't be missed there which is why it is so clearly a distraction. the mueller report was in two parts. hillary clinton wasn't wrong. it talked about russian interference in the 2016 election and laid out ten episodes of what could constitute obstruction of justice. she is correct when she says that. that is not what the republicans were focused on. the other thing clinton made a point of in the interview that gets lost all the time in these

partisan battles is what's being done to protect american elections going forward >> correct. >> that should be talked about every day. >> instead, the administration and congress is fixated on an effort to -- be honest. presidents going after their political opponents, critics with the aim of putting them in jail. sets up a banana republic situation as opposed to rallying around what should be the unifying them of defending the elections going forward which is still in the crosshairs of russia and other bad actors >> thank you all very much for this conversation. coming up, we speak with two senators who were instrumental yesterday. they questioned bill barr. we have richard blumenthal and kamala harris. stick around for that. >> a new cnn poll shows how the leading democratic candidates are doing against president trump. who comes out on top? the answer may surprise you. that's next.

hi dad. no. edon't try to get up. hi, i'm julie, a right at home caregiver. and if i'd been caring for tom's dad, i would have noticed some dizziness that could lead to balance issues. that's because i'm trained to report any changes in behavior,

no matter how small, so tom could have peace of mind. we'll be right there. we have to go. hey, tom. you should try right at home. they're great for us. the right care. right at home.

(coughing) need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites and filters by cabin class, wi-fi and more. so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. kayak. search one and done.

♪ ♪

(clap, clap) olly. a new cnn poll out this morning gives president trump his highest marks yet on the economy. it also shows how the president stacks up against the top democratic contenders in the 2020 race. our political director david chalyan back for an unprecedented and very welcome third segment >> by popular demand. >> thanks, guys. these are so ridiculously early to look at the general election match-ups. this is not predictive. it's a snapshot in time to give us the context of what the president may be up against this election season. we tested the top six democrats. here's joe biden, democratic front runner matching up 51-45% against the president. bernie sanders similar, 50-44%. there is a 5.5% margin of error

in the polls. elizabeth warren is the only one who falls just short of the president but that's a tied race. 47-48%. pete buttigieg is at 47-44. beto o'rourke, this may surprise folks. he performs best in the early data against the president, a ten-point gap. 52% to 42%. kamala harris also edges out the president 49-45%. as you noted, john, despite the president looking like he has an uphill battle, take a look at the number. 56% of americans in this poll approve of how the president is handling the economy. if you stack that 56% up in all of the past polling it's the high water mark. in all of cnn's polling during the trump presidency we have never seen an approval rating on the economy that high. that's what donald trump is counting on for the re-election campaign. he's got a tough road ahead

>> isn't that number about the economy what most elections do boil down to which is on election day, people look at their pocketbooks and decide if they feel good or they don't? >> without a doubt, this number, 56% is why if you are in the trump white house or trump campaign you are not sweating the early general election match-ups that show you are in a close race but behind democrats. you are banking on the fact that americans will feel better about the economy headed into the campaign. >> one of the questions about the trump presidency are his approval ratings divorced from the economic numbers? we don't know yet. we will. >> we definitely will. >> i like when david begins by saying, pay no attention to these polls. >> i don't think that was what he was doing. >> healthy dose of confidence. >> it depends on what you mean

by misrespepresent. >> good point. the college admissions scandal takes another turn. why a family that spent more than $6 million to get their daughter into stanford may not be charged. all the details next.

>> announcer: this is cnn, the most trusted name in news. >> new overnight, sources tell cnn a chinese family whose child was accepted into stanford paid more than $6 million to the mastermind behind the college admissions scandal. so far the student and her parents haven't been charged. bryn gingrass joining us >> $6.5 million is the largest amount of money u.s. attorneys say a parent paid rick singer. according to a source with the knowledge of the ongoing college scam investigation, the participate parents of a chinese student paid singer that enormous amount of money to get their child into stanford. the source says the parents are under investigation because it is unclear if they paid singer to gain an advantage for their child's admission and they haven't been charged in the case yet. we also know the parents were

referred to singer by a morgan stanley adviser named michael wu. according to a morgan stanley spokesperson he was terminated for not complying with the internal investigation. his connection, we are working on. here's how stanford is responding. it is important to say stanford didn't receive $6.5 million from singer or a student's family working with singer. stanford wasn't aware of the reported payment to singer until today's news reports. also, interesting to note this morning about the story, a source tells cnn federal prosecutors have issued subpoenas to more parents connected to the case. no one additional has been charged, but investigators are looking to gain evidence against them like financial records, call logs. finally the so-called target letters we discussed that went to students who may have participated in the scam,

remember, the letters tell the recipient they are the subject of an investigation. with know three students received those so far. lori loughlin's daughters, her parents didn't receive a letter. they have pleaded not guilty of course. >> it seems the scandal gets bigger every week. >> and more interesting. >> thank you very much for covering it for us. royal watchers are on high alert for the birth of prince harry and meghan markle's first child. the little one will arrive any day. the royal couple is saying no to a high profile photo op. max foster is live in windsor with more. what is the due date of the baby, max? >> reporter: something interesting happened yesterday. buckingham palace announced that prince harry would be embarking on a brief tour of the netherlands next week starting wednesday. that convinced all of us here gathered that the due date has to be this week. we'll get to see the new

addition to the royal family in the coming days. >> the new royal heir in the united kingdom. >> reporter: when the duchess of cambridge emerged from hospital with her first baby, prince george, in 2013, she amazed everyone waiting outside including royal reporter emily nash. >> she looked every inch the princess. as a mom myself i found it slightly incredible she was looking so fresh. >> reporter: then kate did it again with baby number two, charlotte. and again with number three, louis. >> most women who have given birth are not remotely thinking of putting themselves on display in front of the world's media within several hours of that happening. it's quite a feat for anyone to endure. >> reporter: the tradition of royals appearing outside hospital shortly after giving birth only goes back a generation to, most famously, princess diana.

>> yes, it would have been painful. she put on a brave face and smiled. she did what she thought was expected in front of the cameras. difficult to do straight after birth, but it was something she felt had to be done. it was done. >> reporter: the duchess of sussex isn't having any of it though. she hasn't even revealed where she's having her baby. she'll only appear before the cameras after the family has had time to celebrate privately, in the words of the palace. >> she's saying to us that her baby, though the baby is born into a public family, one of the most public in the world, is not a public baby. this is our baby. we'll let you see this baby when we are ready to show you, if we show you. >> reporter: then there is the example it sets for other new mothers. >> women won't feel the pressure to look like they are ready for the cover of "vogue" after they have given birth.

meghan is leeading the way. i think it's great. >> you have to ask yourself how many professions there are where a woman is expected to go back to work within hours of giving birth. that's what we expect to have senior royals in recent decades >> it's very exciting, max. you know there are instagram conspiracy theories that the baby has already been born and we haven't been told. >> look, i have been virtually cut out of the royal coverage here. >> you haven't earned a place in the royal coverage. >> i'm happy for them as human beings. congratulations to them. i hope they have their baby on their terms >> here we go. >> why should i care as an american about the 15th in line to the throne being born? >> it's an exciting time. >> i don't need to see a picture. >> they are so in love. they are both so attractive. it will be interesting to see their baby >> do we cover everyone's children being born?

>> we should. >> all right. >> a new round of severe storms expected to slam the midwest. cnn meteorologist and royal watcher chad myers has the forecast. >> we need more than 24 hours a day to cover that. here we go. more severe weather on the ground unlike 31 the day before. more weather coming today. the weather is brought to you by the shark self-cleaning brush roll. here we go. the weather in two spots today. ohio valley and texas. storms have broken up. one part will move up toward cincinnati, indianapolis, louisville and back down to the south, more storms will fire up down in the deep part of texas. deep south part. this is where we'll see storms today and again for tomorrow. then some showers off and on through the weekend. the problem will be the heavy rain. these areas can't take two to three inches of rainfall in three to four hours. we'll run off some of the water, the flash flooding possibility. more heavy rainfall from a

tropical-like system in florida. no, it's not going to get a name. it's certainly going to make heavy rainfall across parts of florida. new york city still can't get the warm front. over the weekend still in the 50s. guys, back to you >> no likey. thank you very much for that, chad >> you're welcome. >> as many of you know i have the honor of sitting next to a "jeopardy!" champion every morning. >> it's true. >> if you don't know, he'll tell you. even he doesn't have the answer to the next question -- who can stop the streak of the current champ? the latest milestone for the current winner, john. i know you are waiting with bated breath. >> announcer: "new day" weather brought to you by the shark self-cleaning brush roll. i deep clean messes like this. this and even this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself.

it's our best sale of the season semi-annual sale... featuring 20% off select diamonds. dare to be devoted. only at jared. here's the story of green mountain coffee roasters costa rica paraíso. meet sergio. and his daughter, maria. sergio's coffee tastes spectacular. because costa rica is spectacular. so we support farmers who use natural compost. to help keep the soil healthy. and the coffee delicious. for future generations. all for a smoother tasting cup. green mountain coffee roasters.

since you're heading off to dad... i just got a zerowater. but we've always used brita. it's two stage-filter... doesn't compare to zerowater's 5-stage. this meter shows how much stuff, or dissolved solids, gets left behind. our tap water is 220. brita? 110... seriously? but zerowater- let me guess. zero? yup, that's how i know it is the purest-tasting water. i need to find the receipt for that.

oh yeah, you do.

the world's greatest competitor -- james holzhauer won his 20th straight game of "jeopardy!" tying for the second longest streak in the show's history and he's raking in a record amount of cash.

this guy is amazing >> it's fun to watch. amazing television. he's up to 20 games in a row. that ties the record from julia collins five years ago. of course the number one winner is ken jennings. he won 74 games in a row. james holzhauer has a ways to go. he topped $1.5 million last night. >> let's see if you came up with the correct response. of course you did. your wager, substantial? of course it was. $ $40,748. and now let's look at the total, shall we, folks? a 20-day total of $1,528,012 >> one of the reasons he's breaking records is he bets so much money. his strategy is out of vegas. play fast, bet big, make a lot of money and take a lot of risk. he tries for the daily doubles, moves around the board and knows so many answer. by the way, that's all that matters >> it's interesting. it's not just that he has a big

brain. he does these other vegas-y things >> there is game theory to this. critics say he's broken the game, changed the game forever. that's possible. these have been taped weeks ahead of time. it's a secret >> the truth is out there. >> we don't know how many games he won. he may have won the entire season. he may be back in the fall. it's a mystery. amazing television >> also amazing they have kept it secret about whether he's still winning or not. secrets don't last. alex trebek battling pancreatic cancer. he talked about it at length for the first time yesterday >> on with robin roberts, talking about this terrifying situation. stage four pancreatic cancer is a real challenge for him. he talked in candid detail about the ups and downs and how he continued to host the show in the middle of it. here's what he said >> i'm used to dealing with pain. i'm not used to the surges of

deep, deep sadness. it brings tears to my eyes. i have discovered in this whole episode, ladies and gentlemen, i'm a bit of a wuss >> he doesn't look like a wuss. >> no. we are seeing a side of trebek we have never seen before. incredible courage throughout this. to be talking about it publicly. he said, i will keep taping the show. i have a three-year contract. he made light of it. talked about wanting to come back for the fall season. he's trying to find the strength to continue through it. you see the strength in real time. it's incredible >> what's interesting, and i agree in the way he's talking about depression. james holzhauer, to have that going on at the same time elevates him and the show >> it does. >> the ratings are way up for "jeopardy!." people are cheering on james holzhauer and alex trebek. >> attorney general william barr isn't showing up for a hearing

on capitol hill today. the big question now is about this man. when will robert mueller testify and how will he respond to the stunning comments made by the attorney general? stick around.

♪ ♪ no matter when you retire, ensure you still have income every month of your retirement, guaranteed. see how lincoln can help. i had nomine...ms of hepatitis c. ...caused liver damage. epclusa treats all main types of chronic hep c. whatever your type, ask your doctor if epclusa is your kind of cure. i had the common type. mine was rare. epclusa has a 98% overall cure rate.

i just found out about my hepatitis c. i knew for years. epclusa is only one pill, once a day, taken with or without food for 12 weeks. before starting epclusa, your doctor will test if you have had hepatitis b, which may flare up and could cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you have had hepatitis b other liver or kidney problems, hiv or other medical conditions... ...and all medicines you take, including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with epclusa may cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects include headache and tiredness ask your doctor today, if epclusa is your kind of cure.

the attorney general made it clear he is not coming to today's hearing. >> he's trying to blackmail the committee. >> he's not coming to the circus. >> it's a defiant performance. we saw him getting grilled >> the letter is snitty. probably written by his staff >> the attorney general lost any trust me may have had. he needs to resign >> he needs to go on the conclusions of mueller. he did that. >> announcer: this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john berman. good morning and welcome to "new day." the ball is now in robert mueller's court. all of washington is wondering how the special counsel will respond to bill barr's senate testimony yesterday, especially

after the attorney general called mueller's criticism of his four-page summary, quote, a bit snitty. will robert mueller come to capitol hill to answer questions? >> barr is refusing to testify today before the house judiciary committee when it convenes in two hours because he doesn't want to be questioned by the committee's staff attorneys. barr offered no apologies for his handling of the report yesterday. he admitted he didn't review mueller's underlying evidence before his summary of the report. we'll speak to senator kamala harris about that exchange in just minutes. lauren fox is live inside the hearing room. she's there. william barr, not going. what is going to happen today? >> this is the room where bill barr was supposed to be. in the chair behind me, that's where bill barr was going into sitting to be grilled by house democrats with concerns about how he